Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
material. his old pal and fellow vietnam veteran john mccain jumped all over him for opposing the search --the surge in iraq. >> were you correct or not to say that the surge would be the month dangerous foreign policy blunder since vietnam? correct or incorrect? yes or no? are you going to answer the question? the question is, where you're right or wrong? that is a pretty straightforward question. i would like for you to answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you are free to elaborate. >> i am not going to give you a yes or no answer -- >> hagel finally gave the answer on the surge that he wanted to give. >> i saw the consequences and suffering and horror of war, so i did question a surge. will this be worth the sacrifice? we lost almost 1200 american during that period was it required, necessary? >> how much of that exchange was political, how much was personal, and how much was related to the defense policy? >> 92, 11, 13. a lot of it was personal. one could not watch those hearings without feeling there were a lot of personal grudges but, even vendettas, being settled. >> c
for please to come in legally so they come from illegally. >> there are some familiar faces. john mccain has been on this issue before. it's not surprising but the real fresh face here is marco rubio. he seems to have spent a lot of time going to conservative talk radio to soften the ground. how important is this to him and how important is he to the whole issue? >> marco rubio is a really interesting player, in part because of his own story. he is the son of legal immigrants. >> from cuban to florida. >> right. he is an icon among conservatives who do see him as the future and he has a way of talking about this issue where he had rush limbaugh essentially eating out of his hand so i think that a lot of republicans do look to marco rubio has -- as sort of finding the path but statement you have the 12345r9 from louisiana saying -- senator from louisiana saying marco rubio is just naive. gwen: what about the president's role? they beat him to the punch in the announcement. he went to las vegas the next day and say me too and we hope they mean it. is he waiting for congress to take the lead? >
. >> the fault line in the conservative movement is pretty clear here. what you have this john mccain warning that sequestration would be 1 million jobs in defense cuts. at the same time, "the wall street journal" editorial page is dismissing the cuts that would result, because they do not want to touch any dollar of tax increases, even on carried interest, for wall street millionaires. >> the cia, drones, targeting bad guys abroad even if the bad guys are americans. >> there is no occasion i am aware of where we had the opportunity to capture terrorists and we did not and we decided to take a strike. >> that is john brennan, nominee to be director of the cia. a lot of attention recently on drones killing bad guys abroad, including awlaki, a very bad guy who happened to be an american citizen. they also kill civilians, and every time you kill civilians, he made more enemies. but you have to go after terrorists, and obama's record, some would say, is impressive. >> it is a continuation of the policy that george w. bush laid down after 9/11, that we pursue them wherever they are and whatever th
. they are very put out about that. >> on fox news, john mccain recall that hagel was very rough on president bush, said that the surge in iraq one was the biggest mistake since vietnam, and that is the reason republicans are down on him. >> john mccain has been shifting positions this week. he is against the filibuster but wants to delay. this thing walks like a filibuster, quacks like a filibuster. it is a filibuster. secretary of defense bill cohen, republican. secretary of defense robert gates, republican. national security adviser brent scowcroft, republican. chairman of the joint chiefs of staff colin powell, republican. all of them are for and have endorsed publicly chuck hagel. who lost benghazi? next it will be lost china, who promoted the dentist from captain to major, and joe mccarthy will find out about it. chuck hagel wasn't even in the government at the time at benghazi. >> you can have as long a list of endorsements as you want, you can look at that and believe that or believe your lying eyes. is not ideology or history. it is competence ptt the worst performance of any nominee for
its duration and he, classed with his old friend, john mccain, and he's paying a price. at the end of the day, he'll probably be confirmed but he has to wait another -- until the week after next to when the senators return to washington to see if he can be confirmed so i think it's an embarrassment to the president. that's what they were trying to do in some case. but enough republicans have said that they're going to vote for him ultimately but you have to wonder, is this really going to weaken senator hagel as a possible defense secretary. all the defense ministers from around the world are meeting next week in brussels. he hoped to be at the table but secretary panetta has to stay on because of this so i think senator reed was probably right when he said this was the worst example yet of partisanship in washington but who knows. something may come up in the next week and a half that might hurt senator hagel but the white house still seems somewhat confident but the question is how does he emerge from this? he -- everyone thought he would get through because he's a senator. but t
progressed, more and more republicans-- including john mccain and lindsey graham-- were coming out of a meeting with republicans saying "we're satisfied in the case of john mccain and graham, request the answers we got about benghazi from the white house. we're satisfied now. but we don't think other senators have had enough time. they're not on the arms services commit tee so we'll vote to hold this up now, when we come back in ten days we'll vote yes. it's not blocking, we just want to slow down." >> warner: what were the motivations? you had reid taking it to a vote where it was predicted he would lose and republicans said yeah we'll vote for it in another ten days but not now. what are the politics here? >> on the republican side, the politics have shifted from the center of the three amigos on national security, jindsy graham john mccain and senator kelly ayotte from new hampshire. it's shifted away from them. they had questions about benghazi which had been a major political issue since before the election. those seem to be moving off the table now. there are senators on the
with john mccain who apparently is convinced at this point in his life the most seminal event in u.s. history was not the constitutional convention, concord, lexington or-- it was the surge. and where you stood on the surge. >> woodruff: in iraq. >> in iraq that determines whether, in fact, you are a visionary or a retrograde. but i was-- it was a lousy performance by chuck hagel. he obviously decided he wasn't going get confrontational. when ted cruz, the junior senator from texas basically accused him of dishonesty, raised questions about his honor, and-- the idea that chuck hagel, that david and i know didn't say wait a minute, you know, and he did at the last question, i'm out of time now but let me ask you about this about your speeches and what you reported and didn't report. i mean at that point chuck hagel says let me tell you, you know, you've just raised a question, i don't care about time or time being out this is my time to tell you, you know, that you are absolutely wrong and-- and that was just missing completely. >> woodruff: so there is some reporting that hagel thi
endorsed john mccain as president. he went to the republican convention we are criticized, the democrat eck nominee barack obama and endorsed mccain and sarah palin. and when joe campaigned in 20080 with mccain, comes back to the senate and senate democrats make him the chairman of standing committee, contrast that with chuck hagel. 84% of americans for conservative action, voting record in his canner radio, voting for the bush tax cuts, voted for the war in iraq, voted against no child left behind but was a small government conservative, and republicans right now, particularly tea party, are not looking for converts like the democrats were with joe leiberman. they're looking for heretics. and they see in chuck hagel who never endorsed barack obama, was friendly with him, traveled with him, but didn't endorse him. they see this terrible heretic. and it's really, that is where the republicans are right now. they are looking for heretics instead of converts. and i think it's apparent in the tea party. but i think it's apparent in the ranks of the entire ranks of the party. >> you have effecti
. number one, this comes from people like john mccain and others who very much oppose enhanced interrogation. >> john and i argued on many occasions. >> rose: exactly right. and he has some experience, as obviously he does. and other people, a, because of american values, even stanley mcchrystal has said this. >> i read his book. it's a good book. >> rose: all right. do you agree with his position? >> no. >> rose: and when we say "enhanced interrogation" why don't we call it what many people believe it ought to be called, torture. >> because it's not. >> rose: what's the difference? >> the difference is we went through a very long, difficult, and elaborate process with the justice department before we started the enhanced interrogation programs, we said "tell us where the red line is." at the agency as we were dealing with the need to find ways to get more intelligence from the people that we're capturing, the conclusion was we needed to be able to use more aggressive techniques. but nobody wanted to use techniques that put us over the line into the area of torture because of t
friend, arizona senator john mccain made clear, they haven't forgotten. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> my reference to the surge being the most dangerous. >> are you going to answer the question, senator hagel? the question is were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. i would like an answer on whether you were right or wrong, then you're free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot of things. >> well let the record show that you refused to answer the question. now please go ahead. >> well, if you'd like me to explain why ... >> i'd actually like an answer, yes or no? >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. i think it's far more complicated than that, as i've already said. my answer is i'll defer that judgment to history. as to the comment i made about >> i think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you're on the wrong side of it. and your
to president obama asking him to withdraw the hagel nomination. but on sunday arizona senator john mccain said president obama's choice deserved an up or down vote. >> i do not believe that chuck hagel, who is a friend of mine, is qualified to be secretary of defense. but i do believe that elections have consequences. >> woodruff: today 18 g.o.p. senators joined with democrats to end the filibuster. hours later, the senate confirmed hagel, 58-41. mainly along party lines. for more we turn to mark thompson, "time" magazine's national security reporter. welcome back to the program. so after all the storm and the fury from republicans, enough of them voted to let this confirmation takes place. what was this all about? >> basically it was on valentine's day that the senate would not let this proceed to an up-or-down vote. instead basically the republicans were looking for something to derail the nomination so for 12 days the nation waited essentially leon panetta was running over to nato and back to his walnut farm. we really didn't have a true secretary of defense other than this lame duck. today
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)